One of the most convincing examples to support impact cratering ideas is seen in thisimage from a youtube video where a ballistic projection hits a lead-metal plate.Here in this example we see further into the importance of considering hydro-dynamicsin an explanation of crater formation. The malleable surface responded to the impact forcein almost the same manner and with similar results as were seen in experiments whichinvolved water saturated soil.

The chain-reaction effect can be projected with very little stretch of the imaginationby combining the dynamics of several experiments where malleable material is involved.

Several videos showing a shock-wave in impressive detail are at youtube channel: "dahlenaz"You can even see a subcrater formed as the shock wave traveled around the globe.

Imagine the chain reaction of the impact which formed meteor crater in Arizon were therewas once a large body of water. Displacement of the water would lead to isostatic reboundover the entire area as the two local inland lakes drained. What were once low-altitude lakesbecomes elevated regions that remain dry to preserve the blemish of the impactor's force.http://para-az.com/colcavity/abstract.html

Marble canyon, according to Walter Brown of Hydroplate-theory fame, is not an erosion feature,it is a crack, and isostatic uplift can be part of the cause. Material desiccation should also befactored into the explanation.

We must be able to differentiate between crater type if we are to advance alternatives. d..z

Excellent article and description of features that characterize and distinguish electrically machined and impact craters. Well balanced, evidence based, and nicely diagrammed. This rather thoroughly answers the OP. Thanks, Nick.

Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

crater on Mars while viewed on google maps (link >here<), unsure of its name, but it is found near the southern pole. my googling skills havent been up to finding a mainstream explanation, does anyone have one? or an alternative?

Hello all!!! Hold with me here as I describe by the end - the Negative and Positive charges of electrical scarring.So I had a revelation the other day!!! I think there is significant proof of positive charges from space interacting with negative charges to form Earth's discharge type formation on the surface. It would honestly have to be done at times of great destruction. At those times - Electron Neutrinos would be moving significantly slower than all other forms of energy - which I dont really think it is supposed to - and so in these times of great destruction and forces moving significantly closer to neutron/circumference - BAM! - distant Negatively charged particles of Muonic Near-infra-red inert gases and Hydrated Near-Neutron type inert gases start working their magic. The Near-infra-red inert gases move positrons almost instantly over vast distances - and then the Near-neutron inert gases in space create folds where electron neutrinos from net equal charge plasma (on a small scale) - repel the Near-neutron inert gases - and the Electron Neutrinos also repel themselves. The speed of this reaction causes positrons to move at a slightly slower rate than the Near-infra-red inert gas positrons - but they would also piggy back on each-other - and be dispersed evenly - but infinitely - on its way to Earth.

So what does this have to do with Electrical Scarring??? Well the Near-infra-red inert gas positrons would create tall mountains and deep oceans through the speed of the reactions causing every wave-length possible - and then the Near-neutron inert gases would create none Alkaline/muonic water sources - as well as causing valleys and canyons because of the ripples of the electron neutrinos and Near-neutron inert gases pushing on each-other....... This is electric because positrons are part electric - and the inert gases use electrons in unique ways......

Yep, I think he is right! How-ever, those moments that require great energy to form the ridges and giant Fulgurite type structures would require a lot more energy usually only seen in great destruction. It would require Electron Neutrinos to move slower - allowing positrons to be reflected more and used in Larger more intense bonding experiences - and then also the Inert gas circuit from distant space - which supplies positrons - would have to be reflected by those electron neutrinos.Without those circumstances - very few positrons are used - and so significantly smaller bonding happens (small in this case could be everything from small scale electrical scarring in labs - to Nuclear blasts. Even if the final one seems large, it is using a different process than what would be used to change large portions of Earth).